MaM a Year Later - Reconstruct the Crime

Status
Not open for further replies.

missy1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
10,142
Reaction score
31,355
We have threads for specific aspects of the case, the RAV4, Zellner, BD, etc. We have separate threads for those that believe SA was framed and those that do not, but we don't have a thread where we can discuss the case as a whole and feel like we are in the right "thread" and aren't going to go off topic. So I hope this works, and I hope it's okay that I started this thread.

MyTinkieGirl made a post earlier today and I thought it would be interesting to discuss :)

"SA did it" is a relatively straight forward crime. Can anyone take me through the whole process by which Teresa apparently left the Avery property and the evidence got to where it did.
I mean, very simplistically, IMO, I can say she met with SA. I can only hypothesize that an advance was made by him toward Teresa, he was turned down, he got enraged, attacked her. She tried to get away and he cut his finger trying to stop her. Since he just got out of prison after being falsely accused of rape, he got all this recognition, and, as a poster child for the unjustly accused, he couldn't be charged with something like that, maybe tried to choke her, and he murdered her - in the garage . He put her in the back of the truck, drove to the pit and left her there. He had time to hide the truck, get it ready to get crushed, lean into the engine, rub off some of his skin cells (DNA) while reaching in, disconnect the battery before he went back and started the fire. SA collected tires, furniture, wood, etc. and burned Teresa to ashes. What didn't burn, and incidentals, got burned in the barrel, or taken away. And, the cremains were found in the general area of his residence, as well as personal belongings and the vehicle of Teresa. That's a pretty straight shot. Pretty easy for a jury to comprehend and, IMO, I don't think they even had any real doubt...reasonable or otherwise.

Now, simplistically, tell me what "really" happened and who all were in on it and how did they go about doing it all in approx. 3 days....even 5 days. Someone else came into play. Someone murdered her, why? She had to leave the salvage yard, no? Who did she see next? After she's murdered, people had to contact people - the police, or Lenk and Colburn, to get a plan together. How did they know the police would even be willing to do something like that? How did they approach these guys with this plan? Someone had to hide the truck. Hide the license plate. Why burn the body? Why not bury her? People had to hand off evidence - to the police...the key. Plant the key - when - how - why the house, why not in the garage, why not burn it with the body? People had to get the blood - from the police. Plant the blood. Plant SA's DNA under the hood. Where was the body burned? Who decided to divide the ashes/bones/phone - how to divide - why to divide? How did anyone not see or hear all this stuff going on? How did they decide who would find the truck? Questions started being asked on the day after she was last seen. This all had to be so well planned out then.

ETA: I'm not even going to bring Brandon into this. IMO, he should be in some sort of trade school program or something - if the state doesn't want him released at this point in time, then, they should at least give him the opportunity to do that. I honestly believe that boy just wanted to get outta the interrogation and go back to school. If nothing else, he just wanted to please people and say the right thing - say the things the person asking the questions wanted to hear. But for SA, he would be off living his life as he wanted to. I don't believe this boy would have ever done anything like that. That's just IMO.
 
I really don't know how to respond to the above post. I have been thinking about it and really, I don't have a set theory, I don't know the answers and I doubt anyone really does at this point. I would guess that if someone had the answers, SA might not be sitting in jail.

But, like you, I have questions. And I wish someone could come up with a theory that I could believe and makes sense to me about how SA did it.

I don't have a lot of time at the moment, but want to address a few things.

According to Zellner's motion she said that TH's phone pinged off the same tower as it did earlier in the day, this tower was away from the Salvage yard and would indicate she was back on her way home. I can't think of a scenario where this is true and SA killed her. How did her phone ping off that other tower then?

The fire.... ugggh that dang fire. JMO but I still have doubts that there was even a fire on the 31st. And if there was, I have doubts that it was hot enough or long enough to burn the body to that degree. And wasn't it said that the remains only consisted of 29% of the body? I can't recall at the moment, but will look later. Where is the rest? It just doesn't make sense to take some but not all of the remains out of the pit if that was the intent.

And just a quick note on the jury... the first vote was 7 innocent, 3 guilty, 2 undecided according to the dismissed juror. http://people.com/crime/steven-avery-juror-says-two-jurors-were-related-to-county-employees/ They also found him NOT GUILTY of mutilation of a corpse. How does that happen????
 
I've been lurking on MaM/SA threads for a bit. This is my first time posting on this case. My husband watched MaM a year ago and has been nagging me to watch it ever since. I know a bit about the case from him and also what I've been able to read on WS (I've probably just scatched the surface). At first glance, I thought SA was guilty for two main reasons, 1) the overwhelming amount of evidence, and when argued it's a setup, 2) moving the bones is too risky - no one would do that. I wanted the read all of the evidence available and then watch MaM before definitively deciding but tv is so much easier. I'm on episode 5 and I've read Gregory Allen's police record and The Fifth Estate special on the Reid Technique of interrogation as suggested on another thread. I'm interested to see how much my opinion changes as I process the show and evidence available. These are my comments so far:
-SA should never have been convicted of the PB sexual assault. I don't mean only 'should not have' but I don't see how a jury convicts in that case. I'm still green though.
-I do believe some of the evidence was planted by LE but if I was on the jury presented with the evidence, I would convict. So, I have to look at if this evidence realistically should have been inadmissible.
-Poor BD. I mean that sincerely. He truly does not have the ability to comprehend his actions and words, nor the actions and words of others. He has no clue. His rights were violated at nearly every step.

I'm not usually one to advocate for the rights of the accused and/or convicted. I generally believe LE does their duty with diligence and ability and they do not pursue the innocent. If they have a suspect, it's probably the right one, acknowledging that's not always the case and some innocent people are convicted of a crime they did not commit. The twist and turns of this case are so fascinating. The investigation was wholy compromised and my general views cannot apply to this case.

JMO.




Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk
 
OK, Ms "Simplistic" over here....Brandon = Brendan, Colburn = Colborn, and, mutilation of corpse wasn't dropped, he was found guilty. (Thanks Missy1974) I'm pretty sucky at this...LOL
I'm actually trying to put together some sort of something to find SA didn't do this. Did I say that?


Just wanted to bring this over from the other thread.
 
I've been lurking on MaM/SA threads for a bit. This is my first time posting on this case. My husband watched MaM a year ago and has been nagging me to watch it ever since. I know a bit about the case from him and also what I've been able to read on WS (I've probably just scatched the surface). At first glance, I thought SA was guilty for two main reasons, 1) the overwhelming amount of evidence, and when argued it's a setup, 2) moving the bones is too risky - no one would do that. I wanted the read all of the evidence available and then watch MaM before definitively deciding but tv is so much easier. I'm on episode 5 and I've read Gregory Allen's police record and The Fifth Estate special on the Reid Technique of interrogation as suggested on another thread. I'm interested to see how much my opinion changes as I process the show and evidence available. These are my comments so far:
-SA should never have been convicted of the PB sexual assault. I don't mean only 'should not have' but I don't see how a jury convicts in that case. I'm still green though.
-I do believe some of the evidence was planted by LE but if I was on the jury presented with the evidence, I would convict. So, I have to look at if this evidence realistically should have been inadmissible.
-Poor BD. I mean that sincerely. He truly does not have the ability to comprehend his actions and words, nor the actions and words of others. He has no clue. His rights were violated at nearly every step.

I'm not usually one to advocate for the rights of the accused and/or convicted. I generally believe LE does their duty with diligence and ability and they do not pursue the innocent. If they have a suspect, it's probably the right one, acknowledging that's not always the case and some innocent people are convicted of a crime they did not commit. The twist and turns of this case are so fascinating. The investigation was wholy compromised and my general views cannot apply to this case.

JMO.




Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

:wagon: to the forum! I have seen your "thanks" on posts, happy to see you posting now :) You will have a different perspective on MaM than most of us, because most of us watched MaM, then slowly read the documents and learned more in the last year. I have a bit more time in the next month, I might go back and re-watch it just to see what I think now LOL

I think your feelings about LE is again how most of us felt in the beginning, or at least how I felt. I have followed a lot of cases, and I don't ever recall questioning LE like I have in this case, it's crazy.

I hope you continue to post :)
 
OK, Ms "Simplistic" over here....Brandon = Brendan, Colburn = Colborn, and, mutilation of corpse wasn't dropped, he was found guilty. (Thanks Missy1974) I'm pretty sucky at this...LOL
I'm actually trying to put together some sort of something to find SA didn't do this. Did I say that?


Just wanted to bring this over from the other thread.

Colburn/Colborn is a terrible one LOL I think they even spelled it wrong in some of the documents/transcripts LOL Colburn/Colborn = AC :biggrin:

I'm going to try to put together some sort of something too.... it's going to take some time, so I might do it in chunks today in between doing some baking and cleaning for Christmas :)
 
So, in order for blood to be "planted", there had to be knowledge of the cut on SA's hand.
Apparently, questioning started on Nov. 1st. Please, anyone, any info I get wrong, correct me, OK?
So, the cut on SA's hand became known during one of the interviews BEFORE the truck was found?

I'll go with missy1974 on TH leaving the salvage yard.

Maybe go back and assume Colborn called in the plate because he really did find the truck on the 3rd. So, between the 3rd and 5th, all this stuff needs to happen. Maybe, we can assume they have no idea what so ever about who did this or why? Teresa's body was found near her truck and she was placed in the back by someone or found in the back of the truck. That would cut down on the amount of people involved. If it was someone TH knew, you'd have to go thru the whole deal of taking a chance with telling Colborn or Lenk, or someone involved with LE. That would be Oct 31 - Nov 4th. The truck found on the 5th.

1) IMO, most important....Someone MUST have knowledge of the cut on SA's hand, in order to know and be able to plant his blood in the truck.
2) Teresa needs to be in the back of the truck, at some point in time, in order for the blood imprint of hair to be there. (Given)
3) Someone needs to remember that there is still a vial of SA's blood available from his prior conviction, AND, that it is a perfect way to frame him.
4) Someone needs to be able to gain access to the blood and get some of it - risk of getting caught?
5) Where to put it when they get it out of the vial - to another vial, or, just fly by the seat of their pants and take the whole vial?
6) Someone needs to decide where to plant the blood and how - QTip could leave fuzz, a finger leaves prints, and, besides, a QTip, finger or glove would give an unnatural smear.
Using a syringe would leave a "spray" sort of pattern.
7) Someone needs to have somewhat of an idea of where to put the truck.
8) Someone must be the invisible man or Harvey Keitel to not leave any trace of themselves.


I can't even begin to try to figure the whole decision of what to do with poor Teresa's body. Anyone else?
 
I'm gonna answer a few of my own suggestions. According to the timeline on the site I refer to - http://stevenaverytrial.com/ - On the 3rd Colborn supposedly calls in the plate # AND questions SA??
Then, Colborn will know about the cut on SA's finger. Therefore, will know it would be an option to plant the blood.


11/03/05 - Sergeant Andrew Colborn calls dispatch to ask about a license plate number (SWH582) and states the year and make of the car ('99 Toyota) during the conversation. Dispatch confirms that the car belongs to Teresa Halbach.

11/03/05 - Sergeant Colborn questions Steven Avery about his interaction with Teresa Halbach on 10/31/05.


**I've fessed up to not being nearly as into all the details as you guys. Hope the timeline I'm going by is correct.
 
just reading along hehehe

MyTinkieGirl ~ right, Colborn went on the evening of the 3rd and talked to SA. On the 4th, I believe it was Lenk and Remiker that went to the Salvage Yard and SA let them check his trailer too that day. So they also would have seen a cut, if the cut existed. I'm a little unclear of when this "cut" was said to have happened to SA..... I have read it was from the metal roofing for the cabin, but SA and his brother went to pick that up the Thursday evening from Menards, so unclear if it happened that night, or the weekend at the cabin (but there is video from a news site that you can see the cut, and it didn't look "fresh")

AC's call about the plates.... it's not clear about when that call was made, but pretty sure it would have been the 3rd, and if it was the 4th, that would be even weirder because he was off work that day lol Something came out recently, I think it is the CASO logsheet, it clearly states her license plate and her vehicle information and was input into the system when she was reported missing, I'm not sure why AC didn't have this available to him in his vehicle.
 
So I got a bit sidetracked today but here I go. To start off with, I am not 100% convinced SA is innocent, if a plausible scenario was presented, one that I can't find too many holes in, I could easily hop back over the fence.

* TH goes to SA's that afternoon. It is not disputed that she was there. There are some questions about whether she went to Zipperer's or Avery's first/last. If we found definitive answers about Zipperer's being last, that would be the end of the discussion IMO. So let's go with she went to Avery's last, which I think I believe now, with the caveat that Zellner has the documents to back up the last ping being off the Whitelaw tower and is approximately 13.1 miles from the Salvage yard. This was the same tower she pinged on her way to that area as well. (I would like to know about this tower... like could it reach the salvage yard, or the quarry!)

I have a few scenario's that I have gone through:

So let's say she went home. There are a lot of things we don't know about TH. There are some things that we do know, she had boyfriends, she had ex-boyfriends and IMO she was like many other normal young ladies her age (not judging her at all). If something happened to her there, I think it's very possible that whoever did it could have read her logs from AutoTrader (her paperwork was never found) it's also possible she told whoever that she had just been there. Does that person then proceed to destroy TH's remains, electronics and dump the RAV4 and evidence found at or near the Salvage Yard? Does LE take advantage of a situation where they "help" the evidence point at SA, getting rid of Avery and the lawsuit?

Does TH make a wrong turn and end up in the quarry and something happened there? Is the original burn site in the quarry? I have so many question about the quarry LOL Did LE find the evidence in the quarry and think that SA did it, but thought it would make a better case if they moved it too or closer to his place?

I have tried my hardest to think of a scenario of where SA did this and had the time with people coming and going and talking to Jodi 2 times that night, going to work all that week, visiting Jodi in jail, going to an auction, going to Menards, going to the cabin on the Saturday, doing media interviews, basically just going about his business. I am not convinced at all that her body could be burned to that degree in such a short period of time, lets say 5-10pm.... no one smelled anything? Not even the tires? Unless he took her somewhere else to burn, like the quarry, but to the best of my knowledge, there is no time where anyone said he wasn't where he said he was. And of course, the lack of physical evidence in the trailer/garage bothers me.

Okay, I'm going to post this... and will add more later. Sorry, I have a million things on the go and I wish I could put all my thoughts here, but a lot of it wouldn't make sense, because a lot of questions have not been answered for me yet :)
 
:wagon: to the forum! I have seen your "thanks" on posts, happy to see you posting now :) You will have a different perspective on MaM than most of us, because most of us watched MaM, then slowly read the documents and learned more in the last year. I have a bit more time in the next month, I might go back and re-watch it just to see what I think now LOL

I think your feelings about LE is again how most of us felt in the beginning, or at least how I felt. I have followed a lot of cases, and I don't ever recall questioning LE like I have in this case, it's crazy.

I hope you continue to post :)

I didn't watch MaM until August. Started with Guilty and now believe SA to be Not Guilty. So, different perspective from me too.

I was aware of the case from hearing about it~~most people in the area believe SA is guilty, so I also believe that as well. The more I dug, and dug and dug~~things just didn't add up, thus my change of opinion.

:)

Oh~~~last by not least....:welcome4:
 
I am at a loss to have much confidence in any reconstruction of the crimes. From my perspective there isn't a lot of reliable evidence.

It seems pretty clear IMO that if Teresa was shot it didn't take place in either Avery's house or garage. For me that presents a stumbling block for Steven's involvement - what with all the phone calls it appears he stuck pretty close to home on the afternoon and evening when the crime is thought to have taken place.
 
I am at a loss to have much confidence in any reconstruction of the crimes. From my perspective there isn't a lot of reliable evidence.

It seems pretty clear IMO that if Teresa was shot it didn't take place in either Avery's house or garage. For me that presents a stumbling block for Steven's involvement - what with all the phone calls it appears he stuck pretty close to home on the afternoon and evening when the crime is thought to have taken place.

I was thinking earlier while I was typing, there is so much "evidence" that I question, I'm not sure anyone can come up with a plausible scenario with anyone involved, including SA.
 
Oh my friend I agree...so, many, questions.

I too have thought TH went home and something happened there..a jilted EX. for example.

She left Avery's alive and some sort of accident happened? Someone hunting perhaps? Stray bullet?

One of the creepy brothers ( SA's ) came across TH and made a pass at her or attacked her?

SA had been " watched " for quite some time & LE seized an opportunity?

If she did go to Zipperers LAST..did something happen there??

IMO, many folks had their reasons for wanting Avery to go away. The brothers wanted money/property, If Barb inherited more..well, ST would have more as well.

LE wouldn't go through the embarrassment of court, AGAIN, the CITY wouldn't be left paying MILLIONS..YES, I think SA would have actually received a VERY hefty settlement.

As has been said before, if TH had upset her ex ( RH ) or her roommate, or any one of the men she had been " dating/sleeping with " ...well..we all have seen time and time again the lengths a lover or ex lover will go to when jealousy takes over =(

Then there's Radant? ( sp )

FWIW..Take your pick! There were just too many folks who DID have motive to pin this on Avery, IMO. And SA was what?? Driven by DESIRE?? Showing LE because he was enraged over being incarcerated from before? Had the hots for TH..so lets rape her and kill her and throw her in a bonfire? A BONFIRE?? A BONFIRE that reduced her to nearly nothing over a period of 6 hrs..give or take. ..Just thinking about a human body..being thrown into a bonfire ( accelerant or no accelerant ) and all I've read on the subject.....HOW would that have been HOT enough to CREMATE most of a body?? No odor..NO pictures..

IMO..didn't happen.

.
So I got a bit sidetracked today but here I go. To start off with, I am not 100% convinced SA is innocent, if a plausible scenario was presented, one that I can't find too many holes in, I could easily hop back over the fence.

* TH goes to SA's that afternoon. It is not disputed that she was there. There are some questions about whether she went to Zipperer's or Avery's first/last. If we found definitive answers about Zipperer's being last, that would be the end of the discussion IMO. So let's go with she went to Avery's last, which I think I believe now, with the caveat that Zellner has the documents to back up the last ping being off the Whitelaw tower and is approximately 13.1 miles from the Salvage yard. This was the same tower she pinged on her way to that area as well. (I would like to know about this tower... like could it reach the salvage yard, or the quarry!)

I have a few scenario's that I have gone through:

So let's say she went home. There are a lot of things we don't know about TH. There are some things that we do know, she had boyfriends, she had ex-boyfriends and IMO she was like many other normal young ladies her age (not judging her at all). If something happened to her there, I think it's very possible that whoever did it could have read her logs from AutoTrader (her paperwork was never found) it's also possible she told whoever that she had just been there. Does that person then proceed to destroy TH's remains, electronics and dump the RAV4 and evidence found at or near the Salvage Yard? Does LE take advantage of a situation where they "help" the evidence point at SA, getting rid of Avery and the lawsuit?

Does TH make a wrong turn and end up in the quarry and something happened there? Is the original burn site in the quarry? I have so many question about the quarry LOL Did LE find the evidence in the quarry and think that SA did it, but thought it would make a better case if they moved it too or closer to his place?

I have tried my hardest to think of a scenario of where SA did this and had the time with people coming and going and talking to Jodi 2 times that night, going to work all that week, visiting Jodi in jail, going to an auction, going to Menards, going to the cabin on the Saturday, doing media interviews, basically just going about his business. I am not convinced at all that her body could be burned to that degree in such a short period of time, lets say 5-10pm.... no one smelled anything? Not even the tires? Unless he took her somewhere else to burn, like the quarry, but to the best of my knowledge, there is no time where anyone said he wasn't where he said he was. And of course, the lack of physical evidence in the trailer/garage bothers me.

Okay, I'm going to post this... and will add more later. Sorry, I have a million things on the go and I wish I could put all my thoughts here, but a lot of it wouldn't make sense, because a lot of questions have not been answered for me yet :)
 
So, in order for blood to be "planted", there had to be knowledge of the cut on SA's hand.
Apparently, questioning started on Nov. 1st. Please, anyone, any info I get wrong, correct me, OK?
So, the cut on SA's hand became known during one of the interviews BEFORE the truck was found?

I'll go with missy1974 on TH leaving the salvage yard.

Maybe go back and assume Colborn called in the plate because he really did find the truck on the 3rd. So, between the 3rd and 5th, all this stuff needs to happen. Maybe, we can assume they have no idea what so ever about who did this or why? Teresa's body was found near her truck and she was placed in the back by someone or found in the back of the truck. That would cut down on the amount of people involved. If it was someone TH knew, you'd have to go thru the whole deal of taking a chance with telling Colborn or Lenk, or someone involved with LE. That would be Oct 31 - Nov 4th. The truck found on the 5th.

1) IMO, most important....Someone MUST have knowledge of the cut on SA's hand, in order to know and be able to plant his blood in the truck.
2) Teresa needs to be in the back of the truck, at some point in time, in order for the blood imprint of hair to be there. (Given)
3) Someone needs to remember that there is still a vial of SA's blood available from his prior conviction, AND, that it is a perfect way to frame him.
4) Someone needs to be able to gain access to the blood and get some of it - risk of getting caught?
5) Where to put it when they get it out of the vial - to another vial, or, just fly by the seat of their pants and take the whole vial?
6) Someone needs to decide where to plant the blood and how - QTip could leave fuzz, a finger leaves prints, and, besides, a QTip, finger or glove would give an unnatural smear.
Using a syringe would leave a "spray" sort of pattern.
7) Someone needs to have somewhat of an idea of where to put the truck.
8) Someone must be the invisible man or Harvey Keitel to not leave any trace of themselves.


I can't even begin to try to figure the whole decision of what to do with poor Teresa's body. Anyone else?

FWIW,
You're fitting in great here;) ( I realize you aren't new to WS ) This Steven Avery discussion. The more the merrier:happydance: ( I honestly mean that )
 
1) IMO, most important....Someone MUST have knowledge of the cut on SA's hand, in order to know and be able to plant his blood in the truck.
2) Teresa needs to be in the back of the truck, at some point in time, in order for the blood imprint of hair to be there. (Given)
3) Someone needs to remember that there is still a vial of SA's blood available from his prior conviction, AND, that it is a perfect way to frame him.
4) Someone needs to be able to gain access to the blood and get some of it - risk of getting caught?
5) Where to put it when they get it out of the vial - to another vial, or, just fly by the seat of their pants and take the whole vial?
6) Someone needs to decide where to plant the blood and how - QTip could leave fuzz, a finger leaves prints, and, besides, a QTip, finger or glove would give an unnatural smear.
Using a syringe would leave a "spray" sort of pattern.
7) Someone needs to have somewhat of an idea of where to put the truck.
8) Someone must be the invisible man or Harvey Keitel to not leave any trace of themselves.


I can't even begin to try to figure the whole decision of what to do with poor Teresa's body. Anyone else?

RSBM I am just jumping off of your post, because these are probably the points that I have seen pop up the most with regards to the LE or someone framed SA.

1) I think you answered this one already, but LE was in contact with SA before the blood was discovered in the RAV4, which is reported to be on the 6th (not the 5th when the RAV4 was found... because they didn't look :thinking: )

2) I agree that TH was in the back at some point. I don't want to be graphic, but I don't think she was back there for long. I think if she had been, there may have been more bodily fluids (but I could be wrong, I'm not up to researching how long it takes)

3) and ....

4) This is where the theory of Lenk came in I think. He was on the chain of custody for some evidence that was used in the exoneration for the PB assault case. Also... the evidence box that held that box with the vial was literally on a counter/file cabinet in the county clerks office. The clerk testified that it was left there because of the media interest and it was easier than bringing the box up every time it was requested. Here is a photo of one of the boxes and where it was. She also testified that Sheriff's Dept was responsible for the security of the courthouse, and that they would have access (master key). I have just read her testimony again and I actually kind of feel sorry for her... she had only been in the position for 6-7 months and it looks like she was trying to put in better security/logging records in the Clerks office.

5) I don't know where you would put it??? a small bottle? another vial? I really don't know. FBI guy testified that in his opinion, the top had been off at some point, not sure if LabCorp would have done that in 1995 or if they would have extracted blood from the vial through the top with a needle for DNA testing. Don't even get me started on the volume of the vial LOL I have been looking for more info for months, and have been unsuccessful! :biggrin:

6) I think Zellner was hoping to test for things like residue or foreign material that could indicate a means of planting the blood (hope that sentence makes sense lol) As for unnatural... this is one of my big sticking points with the blood in the RAV4 for me. Stahlke testifies that a natural blood drop is 0.05ml's. 6 stains in the RAV4 attributed to SA... he estimates the blood to be 1-2 mls. That 1-2ml's would include the fairly small amount of blood to create the smear on the ignition, then there were flakes (uggh I still don't know what that means), a drop on the seat, smeared blood on the CD case, and the big drip on the inside of the door and I'm missing one, but there was another lol I agree with you, I think a syringe would leave more of spray, but might depend on the size of the needle?

7) Having an idea of where to put the truck... if it is someone not even connected to LE.... could they have posed as a customer beforehand? Maybe. IIRC Manitowoc Sheriff dept used the Salvage yard for vehicles that were abandoned or were involved in accidents in the past. I also recall reading somewhere that stolen vehicles had been found in the yard before... whoever stole it left it in there. It was pretty easy to access it from the back of the property (the quarry road). Someone familiar with the quarry, would probably not have a hard time navigating in the yard too (JR perhaps?)

8) I agree. That's why SA and now Zellner has asked them to run the fingerprints against Lenk/Colborn. There was male DNA on the back door handle too, not SA's. Why didn't they test other things... like the battery cable? the latch inside the RAV4 to release the hood?


uggh the burning of TH's body. IF SA did it, and I guess if anyone did it, they did it to burn any DNA or link to themselves. This is what I don't understand ~ He burns her body to hide her and any evidence, but then leaves her in his backyard? but wait, takes some to the burn barrel's and possibly the quarry? I don't care how dumb someone is, why would anyone do that? IF LE somehow came across her body and RAV4 and proceeded to burn her body and plant evidence.... the only reason I can see them doing that is to make sure that if SA didn't do it, there was no evidence on her body to link to someone else. I think that no matter who did it, her body was burned in the quarry or far away, some place that we don't know about right now.

And one other thing, I don't believe Brendan had anything to do with it, even if SA did. So what I can't wrap my head around is why LE or Kratz directing LE or however it went down.... why they did that to him? Why was it so important to include BD in this crime? The only answer I can come up with is that he was #1 an alibi witness for SA and #2 a potential witness against SA (which never came to be because BD would not do it). After watching the interrogation video's (the full one's, not just from MaM), I believe the officers involved were capable of just about anything to get 'their man'.

After posting today and thinking about it.... I still am no closer to knowing the who, what, where, when, how and why *sigh*
 
Thanks for the warm welcome.

In the spring I followed the Tim Bosma murder trial closely, where the murders burned his body beyond recognition is a large livestock incinerator. The manufacturer of the incinerator testified that it produces heat of 1600 F (in Canada there are emission requirements and the incinerator was equipped with an afterburner which increased the output to 1800 F). The witness testified that “Full load of turkeys takes 4.5-5 hours to burn. Swine take a little less because of fat content. A 170 lb. animal would take up to 3 hours.”
There is video footage of the incinerator being used between ~2:00 am to <8:00 am, so under 6 hours to burn the body. In the end, “58 bone fragments, two "virtually complete" bones, and a tooth found in the incinerator”, however, no DNA could not be extracted as the remains had be demineralized/mineralized (I’m not sure which), basically DNA was burned away. (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?518-Timothy-Bosma)

https://www.reference.com/science/temperature-fire-7e753674e1847a3a says a well-stoked wood fire can exceed 1,800 F.

If we use the Bosma case as a benchmark, which is essentially an enclosed furnace burning at 1,800 F for 6 hours and some, albeit minimal, remains were found, are the found cremains of TH reasonable considering an open bonfire could burn at the same temp (I doubt that though) and for around the same amount of time?

If it's worth mentioning, in the Bosma case the murder(s) researched the incinerator well and it was presumed the incinerator was purchased for the sole intention of murder and to leave no trace of the body (it was not proved to be used for anything beyond this one purpose, i.e. no livestock). I doubt anyone cremating a body on a bonfire, knows of these stats and believes it will absolutely destroy the remains, which of course it didn’t.

The burn barrel and multiple locations of cremains are still unexplained. There are some parallels with the Bosma case, because the murders had tried to build an incinerator by welding 3 44-gallon drums together but airflow and debris were an issue.

I’m no further in the series (still at ep 5). This is my mini-disclaimer that I am uninformed in this case.
 
Thanks for the info ILoveDateline! We have a thread here about the bonfire/bones, I have to head to work for a few hours, but will go back and have a look later. Some posters did some research and how hot a fire would be or need to be, etc. I knew about the incinerator in the Bosma case, but I didn't know about them trying to weld 3 barrel's together, so that is interesting too. I do recall reading the day the forensic anthropologist testified, and the lengths she went to to recover every last bit of remains of Tim Bosma and how meticulous she was. Another issue I have with this case.... they didn't allow the coroner, who had a forensic anthropologist lined up, on to the property. We would know so much more about the bones and how they got there if they had allowed her or another coroner and not touched anything until someone qualified could be there.

On another note... I knew I had seen posts of yours before! LOL now I know where.... probably the Bosma case, I followed it in the beginning and maybe even posted a few times, I didn't have time to follow the trial every day but would pop over there and read when I had a chance.

I'm curious, it seems like you recall all the facts about the incinerator, etc in the Bosma trial.... what is your first reaction or thought about this case and whether he would have been able to burn her remains to that degree in a short period of time?
 
RSBM.

Thanks for the info on the specific threads. There is SO MUCH available on WS. It's very daunting to try to come in after the fact and get up to speed. I decided to start at the beginning with the first thread discussion TH disappearance. I'll check out the bones and burn pit threads.

I should reserve my thoughts until I read those threads and make an informed decision but, as of now, my first reaction is there is no way to get rid of a body and no reasonable person believes that a body can be burned to the degree that it cannot be found. It is my position, in general, that a body is burned to destroy evidence, not to get rid of the body. I can't speak to the degree that her remains were burned because I don't know enough about that yet, however, under the understanding that a reasonable person would know it's not possible to destroy all of the remains, I seriously question the location of the burn pit. Doesn't make sense to me. Even taking the body away and trying to burn it in barrels, or otherwise, doesn't seem like it would work well.

I have a lot to get caught up on.


I'm curious, it seems like you recall all the facts about the incinerator, etc in the Bosma trial.... what is your first reaction or thought about this case and whether he would have been able to burn her remains to that degree in a short period of time?
 
I'm gonna answer a few of my own suggestions. According to the timeline on the site I refer to - http://stevenaverytrial.com/ - On the 3rd Colborn supposedly calls in the plate # AND questions SA??
Then, Colborn will know about the cut on SA's finger. Therefore, will know it would be an option to plant the blood.


11/03/05 - Sergeant Andrew Colborn calls dispatch to ask about a license plate number (SWH582) and states the year and make of the car ('99 Toyota) during the conversation. Dispatch confirms that the car belongs to Teresa Halbach.

11/03/05 - Sergeant Colborn questions Steven Avery about his interaction with Teresa Halbach on 10/31/05.


**I've fessed up to not being nearly as into all the details as you guys. Hope the timeline I'm going by is correct.
.
Welcome to the thread MyTinkieGirl! :welcome4:

Nice to have some I think he is guilty on the thread and posing questions other than the obvious...

You and Ilovedateline have brought up some excellent points and insight~~so~~thank you for that.

I have found http://www.stevenaverycase.org/ to be one of the best sources of information on the case and is my go to place when I want to reference back to something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
1,225
Total visitors
1,351

Forum statistics

Threads
589,182
Messages
17,915,220
Members
227,746
Latest member
nmdigital
Back
Top